Letter to T.Hammarberg

From: Svetlana Gannushkina <sgannush@mtu-net.ru>
To: HAMMARBERG Thomas <Thomas.HAMMARBERG@coe.int>
Date: Monday, April 11, 2011, 4:20:21 AM

Dear Mr. Hammarberg,
I am removing you the letter from our European colleagues.
I am very afflicted of the Arbi Zarmaev’s situation in prison of Hasselt.
It was very strange for me that torches take place in Belgium now.
I hope we will meet soon in Russia.
Best regards,
Svetlana

To:

Mr. Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights, Council of Europe

Copy:

Ms. Heidi Hautala, Chair of the Subcommittee on Human Rights, European Parliament

Mr. António Guterres, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Mr. Knut Vollebaek, High Commissioner on National Minorities of the OSCE


Dear Mr. Hammarberg,

I would like to urgently appeal to You to help us organize a S.O.S. group of human rights activists, investigative journalists, lawyers, doctors, politiciens and other voluntaries. This group is urgently needed because of the shocking experiences of some political refugees in Europe. We cannot stay indifferent, stand by and only watch!

On the specific cases in the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and Belgium, I will demonstrate the practices in treatment of the refugees in almost all Europe where the refugees are denied basic human rights stated in the Geneva Conventions.

What is even more shocking is finding that also work of most of the so called humanitarian organizations, which are supposed to be helping refugees, are in fact either absolutely ignoring these people, or just trying to trick them into giving them information useful for the ministries of interior and the secret services.

Despite the fact that for example the Czech asylum law (§ 10) says that every refugee has the right to ask for help at the UNHCR, they either get no answer or are brushed off with one sentence from the Czech representative of the UHNCR, Ms. Marta Miklušáková: “We do not help individuals…” (see enclosure).

UNHCR with the highest status in protecting the rights of the refugees is ignoring calls of individuals and groups of refugees and is doing absolutely nothing to help people under the wheels of the state machinery which is often cooperating with the cruel regimes surching for these people.

Recently UNHCR was noticed for a bizarre patronage of a beneficial ball in the Prague State Opera. Among invited was also Ivana Trampová who was provided with a hotel room for 5000 euro.  But earning from the ball did not reach the refugees – it was donated to the State Opera and the foundation of Tereza Maxová, which is not involved in helping refugees in any way.

Also other organizations having huge grants in disposition from the state, EU and other international donors are doing literally nothing to help refugees. This approach of the so called humanitarian organizations is creating a lawless vacuum for the refugees who find themselves in an absolutely helpless situation.

Ms. Števulová from the Slovak organization Human Rights League advised a refugee from the North Caucasus Aslan Yandiev who was seeking asylum in Slovakia under a different name with false documents, because he was worried about his life, to uncover his identity to the Slovak authorities, knowing his name was on the list of Interpol. Regarding bad experiences of asylum seekers in Slovakia (because of loyalty of the Slovak authorities to the Russian Federation) she must have known that he will be imprisoned. According to the human rights organization Memorial, the Russian Federation likely fabricated a case against him as in many other cases against refugees from the North Caucasus. The lawyer must have known that the refugee after uncovering his identity will be in danger of being turned over to the Russian authorities, but did nothing. Now the refugee is in prison facing possible deportation to the country where he can be tortured or even killed.

As an investigative journalist, I have been following not only mentioned case of a political refugee, but also many others who turned for help to the Czech civic association Help a Man organization. I would like to introduce you some of these cases.

Probably, there are the most alarming cases of Ali Ibragimov and Anzor Chentiev, who have been in prison in Slovakia for more then five years without investigation and a trial, without granting asylum.

Ali Ibragimov and Anzor Chentiev from Chechnya are in a prison because a Russian prosecutor accused them of participation in killing two soldiers in Chechnya in 2001, and wants them to be extradited to RF.

But in December 2010, in a case of a Chechen asylum seeker accused by the Russian prosecutor to have participated in killing eight soldiers in 2002 in Chechnya, the Supreme Court in Finland decided, that the accused was not guilty of any terrorist act as RF procurator says, because the war operations were still continuing in 2002, therefore this act cannot be considered as an attack against civilians.

WHY is there such “refugee policy” practicing by absolutely another way in every member´s country of the European Union?

Even inhuman Dublin agreement doesn´t solve such cases.

During those five years in prison Mr. Ibragimov is mostly alone in a cell. And he was more than two years held in a cell inside which he was locked in a “cage” (cca 2,5m x 3m) so he could not even go to a window.

It has been well documented by human rights organizations like Memorial, Human Rights Watch, or Amnesty International, that the pro-Russian regime of president  Kadyrov in Chechnya is a dictatorship hunting for all who were ever in any way involved in the Chechen resistance or disagree with the Kadyrov´s regime. To arrest these people who run away from Chechnya to Europe the Russian secret service (FSB) is known to fabricate cases accusing refugees of criminal acts. According to all the documents gathered in the cases of Mr. Ibragimov and Mr. Chentiev they are not guilty, but  – I have to repeat – they have been in prison for more than 5 years!

Despite these known cases of political persecutions in the Russian Federation, the ECHR did not accept their appelation  in September 2010, and agreed with the decisions of the Slovakian courts, that a Russian guarantee of a fare trail is sufficient and the refugees can be turned over to the RF.

This decision of the ECHR was supported by the fact that a colleague of hereinbefore mentioned lawyer Ms. Števulová, Mr. Martin Škamla from the same organization (Human Rights League), did not send the ECHR an important testimonial and documents in favor of his clients, which he had in disposal.

All those years,  too, Mr. Škamla did not mentioned the facts in any document as that Anzor Chentiev lost his eye when his village Katyr-Yurt was bombed in 2000, his wife died while he has been in the Slovak prison and he has a six year´s (today) daughter. Or that Ali Ibragimov has a gastric ulcers for fifteen years and was coughing blood, but was refused medical treatment. In August 2010, Mr. Ibragimov was beaten up by the prison guards and had broken jawbone. Only after a number of our urgencies (since November 2010), Mr. Ibragimov was sent to a hospital for a treatment (in March 2011), where they confirmed he had a gastric ulcers (old and new ones) and had his jawbone previously broken, which was before denied by the prison.

When the Slovakian authorities were preparing to extradite Mr. Ibragimov and Chentiev to the RF in November 2010, Help a Man organization turned to the ECHR drawing attention to low quality of Mr. Škamla’s work, attaching documentation which Help a Man already sent to Mr. Škamla in March 2010 already, but the lawyer did not sent the documentation to the ECHR. After the ECHR considered the new evidence, the court unprecedentedly ruled for interim measures and stopped already planned extraction.

Mr. Chentiev and Mr. Ibragimov then again asked for asylum and were refused again in February 2011. Their cases are now again going through the legal proceeding of the ECHR. However, the ECHR is overloaded with cases to solve, but these people are losing a big part of their lives.

We also asked the UNHCR in Slovakia for help, they did not even answer.

We got also involved in another case of a Chechen refugee Ali Atsaev, 17 months  in a prison in the Czech Republic (see enclosure – the letter of human rights activist and Europarliamentaries to the Czech Minister of Interior).

Ali Atsaev, one of the former Chechen commanders during the first Chechen war, was accused by the Russian prosecutor of organizing a murder in 2002 and the RF is asking for his extradition. Regarding statements of the Russian human rights activist Svetlana Gannushkina, there are many reasons to think that also this case has been fabricated (see enclosure).

Among others who were contacted on behalf of Mr. Atsaev´s case was the Czech office of UNHCR. We got no answer.

If Ali Atsaev was turned over to the RF, he would most likely face torture possibly death, but it seems that nobody cares here.

The Czech Ministry of Interior refused to give Mr. Atsaev asylum in first, but courts of two instances ruled that Mr. Atsaev cannot be extradited. Then the procurator introduced  a  “new evidence” – the letter from the last Czech ambassador in Moscow  Miroslav Kostelka,  dating in February 2010 and stating that the RF declared amnesties for those involved in the Chechen resistance in last. And because of this reason, there is no danger for Mr. Atsaev in the RF. Despite this was a false information, a new court decision allowed extradition of Mr. Atsaev.

In the meantime, the Czech Municipal Court in Prague ruled in the asylum case of Mr. Atsaev that the decision of Ministry of Interior was unlawful, because Mr. Atsaev was without any doubt involved in the Chechen resistance as a commander and therefore he could be threatened in the RF, but the Ministry of Interior did not mentioned it. The Ministry of Interior appealed to the High Administrative Court which, in August 2010, confirmed the decision of lower instance about an incorrect decision regarding asylum refusal of Mr. Atsaev, and ruled on the basis  of non-refoulement principle that a decision on extradiction of  Mr. Atsaev to the RF cannot be made before a new decision in his asylum case.

Despite this court decision, there has been no act in the asylum case until now. And in March 2011, the Czech Minister of Justice Jiří Pospíšil decided not to respect the ruling of the High Administrative Court and allowed extradition of  Mr. Atsaev to the RF. Mr. Atsaev’s lawyer turned to the ECHR which within few hours ruled interim measures and stopped the Czech government in deporting Mr. Atsaev to the RF.

Trying to stop the extradition  I sent the local media an open letter of Help a Man organization to the Czech Ministers of Justice and Interior. The letter was signed by the Czech ex-Minister of Human Rights Michael Kocáb, Ms. Svetlana Gannushkina, Prof. Bill Bowring, Bart Staes, Frieda Brepoels, Viktor Fainberg, Vladimir Bukovsky and others.

After publishing the open letter the Czech media publicized documents which we previously provided the Ministry of Interior, and which included an important information about Mr. Atsaev’s involvement in the Chechen resistance. These documents were only for the use of the ministry, but were obviously leaked on purpose, and seriously threatened Mr. Atsaev’s safety.

Among leaked documents was, for example, a personal letter of Ahmed Zakaev.

The minister of justice Mr. Pospíšil replied to the open letter arguing that principle of non-refoulement does not have to be respected, if an asylum seeker is considered as dangerous to the state. But then the ECHR and the Czech Constitutional Court exceptionally decided on interim measures not allowing extradition until next legal procedure. No court ever decided, that Mr. Atsaev is dangerous for our country.

While being involved with the case of previously named and other refugees, for example from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Somalia, Palestine or Georgia we came in contact with many European organizations and lawyers. Their socking ignorance made us investigate more about these so called humanitarian organizations which are receiving huge financial support from the state, EU and through the media are also manipulating the public opinion.

For example, Jana Hradílková – a cofounder of the Czech organization Berkat, which overtook some of the activities of the other Czech organization People in Need in the North Caucus, and claims that it was established to help the Chechen people, said in one interview that Berkat is gathering information for the ministry of interior to inform them about a political climate in Chechnya. And the same person is speaking highly of the Chechen dictator. Ms. Hradílková calls pro-Russian dictator in Chechnya a hard working man who is trying to make his people understand that he is doing all he can for them (see enclosure).

And Ms. Hradílková adds  (June 9th 2009): “And to be honest, according to those I had a chance to talk to, they all agree, that he (Kadyrov) is simply successful. In past two three years I often heard people say: no matter what, this man did more for us then any other among our rulers. The borders of life are tight, but there is space to live…”

And Ms. Hradílková continues: “When I compare my previous short visits of Caucasus, something has changed in my view. I sence a big change in the mood of the people. As if there is less fear, stress and unsecurity,” said Ms. Hradílková  adding that she even knows of families which family members are coming back from emigration.

In the same time, Berkat is receiving money for its project in Grozny directly from the Czech Ministry of Interior and on its web they are declaring how the presidential administration of the Chechen dictator , municipal administration of Grozny and ministries are  pleased with their work in Chechnya. And in the same time they say they are helping the Chechen refugees in the Czech Republic!

The position of the Czech Ministry of Interior from 2009 was that “there is stabilization in Chechnya”, and therefore there is no reason to grant Chechen refugees asylum”. This only changed in February 2011, after the common affords of last Czech Government Commissioner for Human Rights Michael Kocáb, Help a Man and Svetlana Gannushkina, who came to Prague on a special invitation of  Help a Man to urgently appeal to Michael Kocáb in the cases of refugees from the North Caucasus who were refused asylum in the Czech Republic.

Then, Michael Kocáb called The Government Council on Human Rights which appealed to the Government of the Czech Republic to stop forcing these people to leave the Czech Republic.

Breakthrough was a decision of the Ministry of Interior on an asylum for one Chechen refugee in February 2011, which states that all the Caucasians are persecuted by the Russian officials and police in the RF, and they are victims of brutal attacks of the Russian skinheads.

But these are just small victories against the state machinery which is allowing a lot of the organization in the Czech Republic, for example Organization for Helping Refugees (OPU) or SOZE, spent its funds working against the interests of the refugees.

In another example, an asylum advisor of the Czech Consulting Center for Refugees (PPU), Jitka Pechová, who was supposed to be helping refugees, was making so many serious mistakes in the asylum procedures which cost a lot of damage in many asylum cases. Help a Man organization appealed to the Czech authorities criticizing her and her colleague’s work. After these protests criticizing her work Ms. Pechová left the organization and went to work directly for the Ministry of Interior, department of asylum and migration policy.

While Ms. Pechová was working in the Consulting Center for Refugees she was also studying at the police academy (which was not known to the refugees), and the title of her final work was: “The Chechen Question and its Relationship to Terrorism”.

Another refugee from Kyrgyzstan recorded Martin Rozumek, the head of an organization directly cooperating with the UNHCR, the Czech Organization for Helping Refugees (OPU), admitting that he was taking money from her to deal with her papers while this organization is getting a big financial support from the state, the EU, and the UNHCR and others to provide the refugees with free legal help. Mr. Rozumek argued that he was accepting the money as a private lawyer. But he was taking these money in the office of the Organization for Helping Refugees, and never gave this woman any receipt. The woman also said she has many friends who have the same experience with the head of the Center.

The last prove of a systemic rot came from SOZE Brno in March 2011, an organization also established to help emigrants, supported by big state funds, is also supposed to provide legal help to refugees who turn to them.

In a case of another Chechen refugees, the Czech police turned to the Russian embassy to confirm his identity, in February 2011.  This was a serious infringement of the asylum law, but the lawyer from SOZE representing the refugee “did not think it is important enough” to bother himself with protesting an unlawful practice of the police.

And in the center of the EU, Belgium, city of Hasselt:

“The tape recorded the hearing of the State Council on March 16, 2011 is clear: the delegate of the Minister of Justice De Clerck pleads contacts with the Russian embassy and the threat of not being able to recover Belgian citizens, probably convicted for espionage in Russia, to maintain the extradition of the commander Arbi Zarmaev. The deal was enough to sentence a 37-years-old political refugee to a dehydration regime, which in 21 months, has reduced to 48 kilos, 1,85 m tall. He was, as from the eve of this hearing, left without water for 4 days, hand shackled behind his back, with dry bread dropped from the door hole of the prison of Hasselt, until he fell into coma.”

http://droitfondamental.eu/001-sortez_le_commandant_Arbi_Zarmaev_du_block_d_extermination_de_Bruges___en.htm

In despite of interim measures ruled by ECHR in April 2011, Arbi is in very serious health state in the prison yet, he looks like a skeleton, but he is refused by treatment!

As final words I would like to quote Mr. Victor Fainberg and Mr. Michael Kocáb during our visit to Ali Ibragimov when speaking to the director of Košice prison in Slovakia in February 2011:

Michael Kocáb

“This is a total collapse of democracy, what we saw here today!”

Viktor Fainberg

“Thank you for making me feel like at home. Like in the Soviet Union.”

In the light of this experience with the situation of the refugees in Europe, I appeal to You Mr. Hammarberg,  to demand high level cooperation of European UNHCR offices and URGENTLY dealing with such cases of the refugees.

Because often to save a refugee means taking action within days or even hours, I believe it is neccesary to establish a S.O.S team which would intervene when needed.

Sincerely,

Jana Ridvanová

Czech independent journalist

Supporters of the letter:

Michael Kocáb, Czech ex-Minister on Human Rights

Viktor Fainberg, Paris

Hana Demeterová, Help a man, Prague

Imran Ezheev, advicer of Bart Staes, Dusseldorf

Prague 10.4.2011

Enclosure:

To:  Minister of Interior of Czech Republic Mr. Radek John

Prague 3.2.2011

Dear Mr. Minister,

in June and July 2010, the former minister and Czech Government Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael Kocab, appealed the Minister of Justice Mrs. Kovarova, and the Director of Department of the Asylum and Migration Policy of the Ministry of the Interior of Czech Republic (hereinafter referred to as DAMP) Mr. Haishman and his colleagues in the case of not extraditing Chechen Ali Atsaev to Russian Federation. Despite the declared willingness to deal with the case in a satisfactory way, the situation however still remains complicated, respectively indefensible.

Because of this, there was another intervention at the Director of DAMP on November 15, 2010, for this time by Mr. Imran Ezheev, adviser of the Member of European Parliament Mr. Bart Staes. At the request of Mr. Staes, Mr. Ezheev appealed in the case below. However, the situation has not changed to this day.

According to our information, Chechen Ali Atsaev, born on February 2, 1966, is held under the arrest in Praha-Pankrac since February 2010. Russian prosecutor’s office requested his extradition based on charges of alleged organization of a criminal offense of murder.

After two month in detention in 2009, he was liberated, the Municipal Court in Prague issued a ruling on impossibility of extradition to Russia, which was confirmed by ruling of the High Court of Justice in Prague. At the request of public prosecutor for additional evidence the judicial decisions mentioned before were canceled, the case was assized again with decision that extradition to Russian Federation is allowed and Mr.Atsaev was taken to custody again.

The decision of Czech authorities about the extradition of Mr.Atsaev is largely based on information from Czech Embassy in Moscow from February 2010, signed by former Ambassador Mr. Kostelka. It consists of the brief that participants in the first Chechen war (which Mr. Atsaev was, according to evidence, as a commander of unit of armed forces fighting federal army) are no longer in danger in Russian Federation because of declared amnesty.

This information is in full contradiction with the information from renowned international organizations concerned with human rights protection (submitted by Mr. Atsaev to Czech authorities) including, for example, Russian Memorial organization, highly appraised by European parliament in December 2009, which, on the contrary report intensifying persecution of former members of all phases of Chechen resistance (see appendix – letter of Mrs. Svetlana Gannushkina to former Minister of Justice Mrs. Kovarova).

In this case we also want to point out the Report on Human Rights in Northern Caucasus accepted by Parliament Assembly of Council of Europe from June 22, 2010, which states that the situation in Northern Caucasus region is the most serious and most delicate situation in terms of human rights protection and respect for legally consistent state in the whole geographical area under the supervision of Council of Europe. Situation regarding human rights area, such as the functioning of law and democratic institutions raises the utmost concerns: repeated disappearances of government opponents and human rights fighters still remain largely unpunished and are not clarified with due care. Reigns the air of intimidation of media and civic society and court authorities do absolutely nothing regarding these crimes of security forces.

Despite the before-mentioned, in September 2010 the High Court of Justice in Prague stated the admissibility of extradition with notion that „statements about possible persecution by Russian authorities for reasons of participation of the person being extradited in the so-called first Chechen war is not credible because of the undeniable fact of amnesty to the participants of this war from 1999“.

Last year, Mr. Atsaev requested political asylum in Czech republic. The request was denied by DAMP, but the Municipal Court in Prague ruled on December 2, 2009, that the decision be annulled and returned the case to DAMP for reconsideration. But DAMP didn’t discuss the matter further, and, on the contrary, intervened the court on February 4, 2010, in the matter of extradition of Mr. Atsaev to Russian Federation with information, that it recommends this extradition „because in his case didn’t find the above mentioned concerns and threats, and that the reason of judicial annulment of DAMP’s decision wasn’t the fact, that the court would consider the case of the above-mentioned worthy of international protection“.

However, the above statement is demonstrably not based on truth, as is apparent from the rationale of the mentioned judgement of the Municipal Court in Prague:In this case, the court took as established, that the claimant was a member of a group of participants of armed resistance in the so-called first Chechen war against Russian Federation army, and that in a command function. According to the court, this fact establishes reasonable fear that the person being extradicted might be exposed to persecution in Russian Federation because of his membership in a group of participants of armed resistance in the so-called first Chechen war against the army of Russian Federation and this fact would make his position in the criminal trial proceedings worse…The defendant is required to examine and evaluate the claimant’s statement in the application for international protection. In this case the defendant didn’t act like that and didn’t handle claimant´s statements about his possible persecution as consequence of his participation in the so-called first Chechen war. The defendant will have a chance to correct this misconduct in a new hearing.“

Thus DAMP by its statement to the Municipal court in Prague regarding extradiction of Mr. Atsaev grossly disrespected the final order of the court and acted to the contrary of the baseline rule of refugee law – the so-called non-refoulement principle.

It is necessary to point out that opinion of DAMP was absolutely crucial for the decision of the extradition trial, as is apparent from the rationale of the ruling of Municipal Court in Prague on the admissibility of the extradition: “According to Municipal Court the opinion of the above mentioned authority (DAMP) can be regarded as qualified, because this authority has been handling at least hundreds of requests for asylum in Czech Republic by Russian Federation citizens of Chechen nationality“.

In other words, the life of person being extradited got into immediate danger in casual connection with clearly illegal, false and unreasoned conduct of DAMP.

The Supreme Administrative Court denied cassation complaint of DAMP on August 10, 2010 and ruled that the Ministry of Interior has to hear the case of Mr.Atsaev requesting international protection again: The ruling states, apart from other things: „In the question of succession of rulings in the case of extradition and asylum, it is necessary to point out that the ruling about permitting extradition cannot occur before the hearing about international protection will be lawfully completed“. From the mentioned ruling of Supreme Administrative Court it can be clearly concluded that the Ministry of the Interior conducted unlawfully in the case, which in causal relationship has led to the decision to extradit Mr.Atsaev to Russian Federation. The Ministry of the Interior has committed grave misconduct by demonstrably false statement in disagreement with final judgement of the Municipal Court and thus fatally influenced the process of extradition hearing. In other words, the person being extradited was primarily extradited to Russian Federation based on knowingly false statement of the Ministry of the Interior that his hearing about international protection has been effectively finished, even though that demonstrably wasn’t the fact and thus the Ministry of the Interior did mislead the extradition courts.

Please note, that in our opinion the life of Mr. Atsaev is in direct danger in case of his extradition to Russian Federation, because in the case of his extradition his life would be directly and seriously endangered, or, to say by another words, his extradition would break articles 3, 5 and 6 of Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, by which the Czech Republic is bound. In similar cases it is not possible to rely on promises of fair trial from the General Prosecutor of Russian Federation.

The current condition of the Russian juridical system can be understood on cases of, for example, Mihail Chodorkovsky or Sergey Magnitsky, who recently died in Russian detention. A few weeks ago, the European Parliament passed prohibition of entry into EU countries and precept of attachment of foreign assets of 60 Russian officials, including judges and prosecutors, who were involved in the death of the lawyer, Sergey Magnitsky.

The final judgement of Supreme Administrative Court took place more than four months ago, but the DAMP didn’t do any acts in the case and Mr.Atsaev is still held in prison.

Currently, we were informed about DAMP decision regarding the granting of asylum to Chechen citizen R. O., 2.2.2011, which claims important fact: „… there is a discrimination of native Caucasus people in Russian Feredation. These people are dicriminated by authorities, they become  an aim of the police vexation …“ (see enclosure no.2, page 4).

We ask you, Mr. Minister, to take actions leading to rapid resolution of Mr.Atsaev’s request for asylum.

Sincerely,

Michael Kocab (Czech Rep.), ex-minister for human rights

Svetlana Gannushkina (RF), Chairwoman of  the  Civic Assistance Committee and  Migration Rights Network,  Board member of the  Memorial,  member of the Council for the Development of Civil Society Institutions and Human Rights under the President of Russia.

Prof. Bill Bowring (Great Britain), supporting enclosure letter of Svetlana Gannushkina, Barrister, Director of the LLM/MA in Human Rights School of Law,  Birkbeck College, University of London, Chair of the International Steering Committee of the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), President of the European Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights (ELDH)

Frieda Brepoels (Belgium), Member of European Parliament,

Bart Staes (Belgium), Member of European Parliament ,

Viktor Fainberg (France),

Vladimir Bukovsky (Great Britain),

Alla Dudaeva (Georgia),

Anzor Maskhadov (Norway),

Victoria Poupko (USA), Head of  “Anna Politkovskaya Memorial Fund”

Imran Ezheev (Germany), advicer of the Member of Europian Parliament Bart Staes, Head of the “Goodwill without borders”

Nadezhda Banchik (USA), journalist, Amnesty Internarional USA

Jana Ridvanova (Czech Rep.), journalist

Hana Demeterova (Czech Rep.), „Help a man“

In the reaction for the letter, the Minister of Justice Mr. Pospíšil decided to extradite Ali Atsaev to RF, in Mart 2011.

But ECHR and Constitutional Court stopped this activity by ruling of interim measures.